Talk:2005 Birmingham tornado

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Luffaloaf (talk | contribs) at 03:15, 20 December 2024 (→The tornado was rated F2, or T4, not “T5-6” or F3). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 03:15, 20 December 2024 by Luffaloaf (talk | contribs) (→The tornado was rated F2, or T4, not “T5-6” or F3)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Weather: Thunderstorms / Tornadoes Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Misplaced Pages. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details.

WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Severe weather (assessed as Low-importance).

West Midlands Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject West Midlands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of West Midlands on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.West MidlandsWikipedia:WikiProject West MidlandsTemplate:WikiProject West MidlandsWest Midlands
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Significance

Is this event significant enough to warrant an entry in Misplaced Pages? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianlucas (talk • contribs)

As it's the strongest tornado ever recorded in the UK then I'd say yes.--Ukdan999 23:33, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Except that further down the page its says that a stronger tornado occurred in 1810 in Plymouth! treesmill 19:33, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

The notability is pretty clear - it was an unusually strong tornado striking the largest provincial city in Britain. In case the American contingent still don't get the significance, just imagine if it were your country's largest provincial city, New York - we'd get pages of speculation, edit wars, and conspiracy theories. A435(m) 21:14, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

THE LARGEST PROVINCIAL CITY IN ENGLAND OR THE UK!!!

Sorry... People using the word 'britain' or 'british' really annoys me for some reason... --81.97.195.36 20:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Please take a look at Great Britain - it is a legitimate term used to describe the largest island in the British Isles.-Localzuk 20:27, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Coventry

I question the Coventry tornado report and have asked for a citation. I believe this may refer to an event that occurred not on the day of the Birmingham tornado, but on 24 June 2005. Certainly the locations fit the report that appeared in the local media. TORRO (the UK's leading tornado and storm reporting organisation) found no evidence of a tornado on the ground and concluded that video evidence showed a rainshaft, not a tornado or funnel cloud. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sp saunders (talk • contribs) 03:22, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I removed it. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 09:42, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/Media/tornado.pdf?MEDIA_ID=103940&FILENAME=tornado.pdf
- In 2005 Birmingham tornado on 2011-05-25 07:56:04, 404 Not Found
- In 2005 Birmingham tornado on 2011-06-12 00:38:35, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:38, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/Media/Tornado%20Exhibition%20G5.pdf?MEDIA_ID=133502&FILENAME=Tornado%20Exhibition%20G5.pdf
- In 2005 Birmingham tornado on 2011-05-25 07:56:04, 404 Not Found
- In 2005 Birmingham tornado on 2011-06-12 00:38:46, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:39, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 2005 Birmingham tornado. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110514001949/http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/tornado to http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/tornado

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:59, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2005 Birmingham tornado. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:48, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

The tornado was rated F2, or T4, not “T5-6” or F3

Not sure the recent tendency I’ve seen on the part of some to exaggerate European tornadoes. The official damage survey clearly says it was rated F2 or T4:

“Within days after the event, the authors conducted a ground damage survey. We found the damage path extended about 11 km long and ranged up to about 300 m wide. Some of the most intense damage occurred in the Sparkbrook subdivision where numerous roofs were removed. The authors rated the damage at EF-2 on the Enhanced Fujita scale and T-4 on the TORRO scale. Maximum three-second wind speeds were estimated at between 50 and 60 ms.”

this can be found here:https://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/115203.pdf Luffaloaf (talk) 02:43, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

That’s not the official survey. In the United Kingdom, the official organizations are the Met Office and TORRO. In 2015, TORRO upgraded the tornado to T5/T6: “Ten years ago this month on 28th July 2005 shortly after 1:30pm a tornado struck Birmingham causing extensive damage…Rated T5/6 making it the strongest tornado since 1954. It hasn’t been equalled since.” The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 02:49, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

This file does not contain a damage survey. The file I posted contains the damage survey, which includes Tim Marshall, who applied the EF wind scale, and it specifically says that the most intense damage peaked at T4 or F2 strength - not remotely F3. The images clearly do not display “strong” tornado damage. You are deliberately trying to exaggerate European tornado climatology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luffaloaf (talk • contribs) 02:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

So you think Haag Engineering Company can “officially” rate tornadoes? Note, that paper was not written by the NWS, but Haag Engineering Company, i.e. not even a government organization. Do you have any proof to back up your statement that the Haag Engineering Company is the “official” tornado rater for the UK? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 02:59, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

The U.S. established the precedence for tornado damage surveys, which are always carried out with engineers to analyze what winds certain components failed at. Your PDF file doesn't contain the actual damage survey from the tornado. Mine does. Here's the ResearchGate link for it: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327022710_Birmingham_UK_Tornado_28_July_2005. The F2 rating was also established in the BBC documentary on the tornado released in 2012. The Met office, which wasn't involved in the damage survey to my knowledge, informally exaggerated the tornadoes damage by saying to could've reached T5 strength at one point. I'm not sure what case you think you have here. So in the commemorative PDF they said it was T5-6? We have an actual damage survey, as we've seen with more rigorously documented US tornadoes, that gives an EF scale rating of EF-2. How can you ignore this? Luffaloaf (talk) 03:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

@Luffaloaf: — So we do not get into an edit war, do you mind if I start a community discussion to figure out if the article infobox should say F2/T4 or F3/T5-T6? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 03:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Categories: